Debates of Sept. 23rd, 2024

Agriculture and Agri-Food

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Battlefords—Lloydminster has the floor.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Speaker, after nine years of the Liberal government, we know that life has never cost Canadians more. Across the country, Canadians are going hungry in record numbers. The Prime Minister's reckless budgeting and failed policies have caused the worst inflation in 40 years, and food prices have skyrocketed. This year alone, families will spend $700 more on groceries than they did last year, and that number keeps growing year after year.

Food Banks Canada has reported a 50% increase in visits since 2021 with a record-breaking two million visits in a single month. Hard-working Canadians should not have to rely on food banks to not go hungry. However, that is the government's record. Only one in six adults visiting a food bank is unemployed, meaning they do not have a job. In other words, that means five out of six Canadians who are visiting a food bank are employed. These Canadians cannot make ends meet. Their paycheques are overstretched and they are not keeping up with the rising costs caused by the Prime Minister's inflationary deficits and taxes.

What is certain is that the Prime Minister's plan to quadruple the carbon tax is only going to make things worse. The carbon tax is adding to the cost of groceries at every single point in the food supply chain. At the end of the day, Canadians will pay the price. Conservatives have said over and over again in this House that when we tax the farmer who grows the food, the trucker who ships the food and the grocer who sells the food, it is going to cost Canadians more.

It is not just Conservatives the Prime Minister is ignoring. The Canadian Trucking Alliance recently reported that the NDP-Liberal coalition's carbon tax added $2 billion to long-haul trucking costs this year alone. That figure will go up to $4 billion in 2030. The Canadian Trucking Alliance was clear that these costs “cannot be absorbed [by truckers] and must be passed on to customers.” That means Canadians. That is moms and dads, students and seniors who are on fixed incomes. They are all picking up the bill for the Prime Minister's punishing carbon tax.

Food insecurity should not be a problem in a country like Canada, but more and more Canadians do not know where they are going to get their next meal from. The increased costs on farm businesses threaten their long-term viability. Our farmers produce safe, nutritious, good-quality food, but if the cost of doing business continues to increase exponentially, it will eventually put our hard-working farmers out of business. That is the threat not only to the agriculture industry but to Canadians and all those around the world who depend on the food grown here in Canada.

Our farmers pay retail prices for everything they buy for their farm businesses, but they sell products at cost. Farm businesses already had tight margins and the costly carbon tax is a massive hit to their bottom line. There are massive carbon tax bills and they are only growing. Saskatchewan farmers paid $12 million last year in carbon taxes on natural gas and propane to dry grain, heat and cool livestock barns, and grow their food. With this year's carbon tax hike, that number will go up to $15 million. By 2030, it is estimated that the carbon tax will cost a typical 5,000-acre farm in Canada $150,000 in carbon taxes.

Our farmers cannot afford the carbon tax. It is absolutely critical that the government pass Bill C-234 in its original form. We cannot afford to lose our Canadian farm families. Passing Bill C-234 in its original form would also acknowledge the work that our farmers are already doing to safeguard our environment. Our farmers are global leaders in sustainability. They have been mitigating, removing and sequestering greenhouse gases long before the Prime Minister and his punishing carbon tax.

For years, our farmers have delivered meaningful reductions in emissions through the adoption of new technologies, education and innovative management practices. Our farmers care for the environment because it is in their DNA to do so. They know how important it is for their farm businesses and for future generations. It does not make sense to to punish our farmers, who are already doing so much to protect the environment, with costly and punishing taxes.

The Prime Minister's carbon tax is not about the environment at all. It is actually just a tax plan. If it was about the environment, the Prime Minister would recognize the sustainability work of our farmers. Taxing our farmers does nothing to help with the environment. In actuality, it harms their ability to reinvest in their businesses and adopt the latest technologies.

Bill C-234 in its original form would remove the carbon tax on propane and natural gas for greenhouses, heating and cooling livestock barns, and grain drying. The PBO has reported that Bill C-234 in its original form would save farmers nearly $1 billion by 2030. What that really means is that the Prime Minister wants to take $1 billion from our farmers, who already have very thin and often unpredictable margins, so that he can pay for his out-of-control spending habits.

Passing Bill C-234 in its original form will keep those dollars in the businesses of our farmers and will help keep farming a more viable business. However, we know that the Senate has gutted Bill C-234, which threatens the savings. The removal of barns and greenhouses from the carbon tax exemption and the shortening of the sunset clause fall very short of what this bill was trying to achieve.

These amendments were not requested by farmers or by farm groups, nor was it requested by Canadians. In fact, polling shows that the majority of Canadians support scrapping the carbon tax on farmers. Farmers across commodities were unified in their support of this bill in its original form. Shamefully, the Prime Minister used Liberal-appointed Senators to gut this bill, and according to the PBO, the gutted bill will eliminate $910 million in relief to farmers.

When it comes to the carbon tax, the Prime Minister is not listening. He is not listening to Canadians who are going hungry. He is not listening to the premiers. He is certainly not listening to Conservatives, and he is not listening to our farmers. Canadians cannot afford to have the Prime Minister continue to bury his head in the sand while his finance minister pretends that Canadians have never had it so good.

The Liberal government needs to pass Bill C-234 in its original form and stop burdening our farmers with enormous costs so that they continue to do what they do best, which is to increase their productivity, do more with less and lead in sustainability and innovation, all while growing safe, nutritious and good-quality food for Canada and the world.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the strategy of the Conservative Party, as its leader says, is to cut the carbon rebate and cut the carbon tax, thereby reducing the cost of food by 34%. I wonder if the member genuinely believes what her other colleagues are saying on that point.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Madam Speaker, I genuinely believe that, when the leader of the Conservative Party becomes prime minister, he will cut the carbon tax, which will be a relief for all Canadians.

I would like to remind the House that, on December 8, 2022, we had an opposition day motion, which was to remove the carbon tax from all food production. We were the only party that supported it. It is shameful.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The question is on the motion.

If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

The hon. member for Lambton—Kent—Middlesex.

[Lianne Rood, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Madam Speaker, we request a recorded division, please.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the division stands deferred until Tuesday, September 24, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

If motions are now finished, we should proceed to petitions.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

Yes, but we only have 10 seconds remaining.

The hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan will have to present at another time.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Public Services and Procurement

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is good to be back in this place after the summer, a summer, though, in which I heard a great deal from my constituents about how frustrated they are with the cost, the crime and the corruption they are seeing under the NDP-Liberal government. The government has so badly failed, and that is why tomorrow the Conservatives will bring forward a motion of non-confidence in the government, and we will see where the various parties stand. Conservatives are clear that the tenure of cost, crime and corruption over the last nine years must come to an end.

We will see which parties want to allow the government and the Prime Minister to continue and which parties in this place want to make their case to the Canadian people and give the people a chance to elect a government that reflects their aspirations and hopes for what the future of this country can offer.

In the context of the cost, crime and corruption, we are seeing scandal after scandal that incorporate all three, scandals that involve significant cost to the taxpayer, that involve potential criminal activity that in some cases will likely lead to criminal charges that have already spawned RCMP investigations, and that clearly involve forms of corruption.

I am following up tonight on a question I asked about the arrive scam scandal, a scandal that members will recall led to Kristian Firth from GC Strategies, the principal company involved in the scandal, being hauled before the bar of the House of Commons because he refused to answer questions asked at committee. I pointed out in my question that GC Strategies got tens of millions of dollars in the arrive scam scandal for no work. It simply received the contracts and then subcontracted. It did not do any actual IT work. It did not build the app. It just received a contract and subcontracted.

The company was found in 2015. What else happened in 2015? That is the same year the Prime Minister and the government took office. The Liberals came into office promising change. The only promise they fulfilled was real change; a lot of things certainly changed in the last nine years. In the same year, GC Strategies was founded. The company has gone on to do very lucrative business with the government, and its activity is staff augmentation. It receives contracts and subcontracts.

We have an app that could have been built in a weekend by an actual IT firm, but instead of hiring a firm with IT expertise, the government hired subcontracting middlemen who got the contract and subcontracted all the actual work. Right before Kristian Firth came before the House, there was an RCMP raid as part of an RCMP investigation into GC Strategies' activities.

There are the costs; Canadians spent tens of millions of dollars on the glitchy app that did not work and sent over 10,000 Canadians into quarantine by accident, Canadians who met all the requirements. There is cost, waste, inefficiency, corruption and the RCMP investigation into criminal activity. The government persists in using the GC Strategies model, in wasting huge amounts of taxpayers' money.

It talks about how other parties would cut. I submit that with the waste we have seen with GC Strategies, there is a lot of opportunity to save taxpayers' dollars without having any noticeable impact on frontline services.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the hon. member's question.

The Government of Canada shares the member's concerns about alleged wrongdoing in our procurement process, as do all parliamentarians and Canadians across the country. This is why we voted in favour of the motion to call Mr. Firth to appear in the House to answer questions, and we trust that his testimony was fulsome and forthright in responding to those questions.

Canadians are equally concerned about what they have been hearing in the media and in the committee, and we are using many tools of inquiry and following many avenues as we seek to understand what went wrong in the case of ArriveCAN. It is frustrating that we have had to take the extraordinary measure of a public rebuke here in the House of Commons to get answers to those questions, but the government did vote in favour of doing so, and that consensus speaks to how seriously every member of the House takes the issue.

There is a complex network of people, policies and procedures in place to ensure that government contracts proceed efficiently, with clear value for taxpayer dollars, and when something goes awry, or worse, as it appears to have been the case with the ArriveCAN contracts awarded to GC Strategies, it is necessary to act decisively to restore trust in the system. The government has taken a number of actions in response to this issue, and I would like to detail a few of those actions.

Last November, at the request of the Canadian Border Services Agency, Public Services and Procurement Canada issued stop-work orders to GC Strategies, as well as Dalian and Coradix. This halted work on all active contracts with the CBSA while the various investigations moved forward. All departments and agencies with active contracts with these companies were asked to verify their CVs connected to those contracts and that the appropriate consent to use those CVs was obtained.

In March of this year, PSPC suspended the security status of GC Strategies and Dalian Enterprises until further notice, and this effectively prevents these companies from participating in any federal procurement with security requirements. More broadly, PSPC has taken concrete actions over the past year to strengthen the oversight of all professional service contracts falling under PSPC authority.

The department is actively engaging with client departments and agencies to ensure that these new measures are implemented quickly and efficiently, and our government is extremely troubled by allegations of fraudulent activity at a time when Canada's people and resources were in a tremendously vulnerable state.

We know that ArriveCAN was a useful tool to help keep Canadians safe in a time of crisis, but even in exceptional circumstances, it is absolutely necessary that public money be spent with due diligence and that all activities be properly documented. The early development of the application has been an object lesson. The government shares the member's concerns with this member and his desire to hold those responsible to account. This is why, as we continue to support the various investigations and inquiries in this matter, we appreciate all parties' support.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member says that all parties voted in favour of the motion to bring Kristian Firth before the bar. Actually, when Kristian Firth came before the bar, the government refused to participate in the questioning. They did not want the questioning to proceed, and it is clearly on the record that they refused to participate, so while members of all the opposition parties, even the Green Party, participated in the questioning, the government did not.

I am just struck, listening to the parliamentary secretary, by how often corruption just happens to the government. They are dismayed by all the things that are happening in the government that they are supposed to be running. The core problem with the government is that, while pursuing malicious policies that undermine the common good, they would like to pretend that somebody else is responsible for everything that goes wrong.

Will the minister and the parliamentary secretary take responsibility for all the corruption that has happened under their watch?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Madam Speaker, like I said, all parties are troubled by the circumstances surrounding contracts awarded for work on the ArriveCAN application. Canadians and Parliamentarians deserve and demand answers, as does the government. There are many inquiries and investigations into the ArriveCAN contracts issue, and we fully support all of that work. It is important that we allow these activities to conclude so we can make decisions based on a full picture of what happened.

As we continue to work across party lines to uncover the facts, we expect candid and complete testimony at all committees, and in the case of Mr. Firth and GC Strategies, that did not happen. That is why we voted for Mr. Firth to present himself here in the House, and we will continue to support the investigations and inquiries into this matter.

Oil and Gas Industry

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am back again this evening to continue calling for a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry. I am doing so, first of all, because life continues to become less affordable for folks in my community, and corporate profits have a lot to do with it. In fact, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives found in January 2023 that for every dollar spent on higher prices in the last two years, 47¢ was converted into corporate profits in four industries, with mining and oil and gas leading the way.

Lots of attention, in this place at least, has been placed on the carbon tax, but here are the facts. Much more responsible for the increased costs of day-to-day living is the gouging of the oil and gas industry. In fact, in 2022, when the carbon price went up 2¢ a litre, the profits of the industry went up 18¢ a litre. There are no rebates on that gouging. In 2022, the five largest oil and gas companies operating in Canada alone made more than $38 billion. That was after they repaid shareholders $29 billion in increased dividends and share repurchases.

Meanwhile, the climate crisis rages on. Canada is warming at twice the rate of the global average, and the Canadian Arctic is warming at about three times the global rate. The impacts of the climate crisis are being felt across the country with more severe and more extreme weather events, including wildfires that consumed almost 46 million acres in 2023.

The government could both address the affordability crisis and fund climate solutions by taking a step it took with banks and life insurance companies during the pandemic, and that is introducing a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry. It is what I proposed in Motion No. 92 over a year ago. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has already studied it. A one-time tax on 15% of profits over $1 billion would generate $4.2 billion, every dollar of which could go toward proven climate solutions that make life more affordable, such as, for example, public transit, to reduce fares and improve service at a time when the government is talking about the next public transit fund not starting until 2026. This money could get that going a whole lot faster.

It is also well supported, most importantly by Canadians. In a recent nationwide poll, 62% of Canadians supported a windfall profits tax on oil and gas. It is likely why the idea has such strong support among my colleagues in different parties, including the Bloc, the NDP and the Liberal Party. It is partly why the UN Secretary-General, as another example, has called on “all developed economies to tax the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies”, like environmental organizations across the country. As the David Suzuki Foundation said, “Momentum is building for a windfall profit tax on oil and gas companies’ excessive profits. It’s easy to see why: the fossil fuel industry has made the affordability crisis harder for people while making out like bandit.” Canadians for Tax Fairness has said, “A windfall profits tax is one way to make sure that O&G companies...aren't capitalizing on our affordability crisis.” Other countries have done it, like the U.K. and those in the EU. In fact, the Liberal government planned to put it in last year's budget, but pulled it at the last minute after intense lobbying from the industry.

It is clear from the polls that Canadians want to see more from the government on affordability and the climate crisis. Why not introduce a windfall profits tax and demonstrate that it has the big ideas necessary to meet the moment we are in?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. friend and colleague from Kitchener Centre for his continued advocacy on this important issue and policy step. It is important, and our government firmly believes that at a time when middle-class Canadians are struggling to get ahead, and when it feels to so many like their hard work is not paying off as much as it used to, it is necessary for the government to improve fairness in Canada's tax system. As we know, since 2015, our government has reduced taxes for the middle class and we take steps forward on this very seriously.

The member knows that since I was a very young guy, I have always been an environmentalist and a staunch advocate for climate action. We have had many conversations about this and many other issues. I want to state, though, that I do not find the government's contributions and focus on things like active transportation and public transit to be trivial. In fact, they have been massive steps forward.

In Milton, for example, one of the first announcements I made was $4 million for a new public transit system. This is in a suburban community without a lot of density. We are just getting there when it comes to public transit being a necessity for our community, but our government has been there as a partner. Whether that is through the gas tax, or through the transfer that we do with the municipal funds, our government really has been there.

Since 2015, our government has reduced taxes on the middle class twice. It has implemented a number of measures to ensure the wealthiest individuals and corporations are contributing their share, most recently with capital gains changes. Some of these things are tough. Hard things are hard. When a government decides to take steps forward to find a fairer way to deal with taxation and the services Canadians require, including child care, dental care, pharmacare and other important services that all Canadians rely on at a free or affordable rate, we know that the wealthiest people in Canada are powerful and have the ability for push-back and, yes, lobbying, as the member pointed out.

Therefore, we take those risks; we take them confidently and we step forward for Canadians because we know it is the right thing to do. We believe it is time to ask the wealthiest Canadians to contribute a bit more. It is true that the wealthiest Canadians have gotten wealthier over the last five or six years. We have talked a lot in this House about this K-shaped curve, which, following the pandemic, shows that Canadians who were struggling a bit before the pandemic are struggling more now and folks who had a lot now have more.

Taking this step will allow us to move forward with bold actions announced in the most recent budget and to build a fairer future, with transformative instruments for housing and innovation, with respect to the clean economy and for younger generations. These major investments require new revenues and that is why we have proposed in budget 2024 to increase the inclusion rate on capital gains realized annually, above a quarter of a million dollars by individuals and on all capital gains realized by corporations and trusts, from one-half to two-thirds effective this past June 25. We expect this new measure will generate more than $19 billion in new revenues over the next five years. Thanks to these new revenues, we will be able to build better supports for those who need it most and make investments that will increase fairness for everyone.

I reflect back on some of the efforts by the first Trudeau government, in the late 1970s and early 1980s, to create a stronger social safety net and more non-market housing to ensure everybody had a place to live. I know a lot of MPs in this House have conversations frequently with people who are really frustrated and struggling and in legitimate need of housing. We have a lack of affordable housing in my community. In fact, I spoke to a gentleman just recently who is living in his truck and has fallen on really tough times. We need to find solutions for gentlemen like him. These measures to tax the wealthiest Canadians—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the parliamentary secretary talked about finding solutions. We have one for him right here.

If he is looking for $4.2 billion that could be invested in making life more affordable for folks in Milton, the same way it would in Kitchener Centre, and if he is wondering where we can find the wealthiest folks to make sure we redirect those funds toward those who need it the most, we have the answer: It is the oil and gas industry, with $38 billion from the top five companies alone. If we even just put a 15% tax on profits above a billion dollars, the way other countries already have, the way economic experts are calling for and the way Canadians are calling for, we could use that money to invest in the public transit I know the parliamentary secretary is a champion for and to invest in retrofitting folks' homes.

The question is the same: If the government pretends to understand the climate crisis and the affordability crisis, why is it not moving quickly to put in place a windfall profit tax on the excess profits of the oil and gas industry?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I take exception a little bit to the suggestion that we have not taken note of what oil and gas executives and the mega corporations have been doing. They were at the environment committee, and I demanded answers from some of the CEOs. Frankly, what I heard back from the CEOs was inadequate. It was a demonstration that they actually do not know where they are invested and the impact, particularly on the oil sands side, they are having on the environment.

It is absolutely devastating, but I disagree with the suggestion that the government has not taken all necessary actions to both combat the climate crisis and buoy our economy through what so many economists said, two or three years ago, was a certain recession. We have avoided that recession. We have balanced our priorities to make sure we have protected jobs. We have lowered our emissions. At this time, interest rates are down, inflation is down and gas prices are down.

Carbon Pricing

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, over the summer recess, I had the opportunity to speak with many constituents, as well as many local businesses. I heard first-hand how the carbon tax burden is affecting them. I was invited to tour the Virtex Grain Exchange in my riding, where non-GMO canola oil is produced. The Virtex Grain Exchange is another testament to the resilient spirit of Canadians fighting to make a living after nine years of the Liberal government's disastrous financial policies, none more so than the carbon tax, yet another example of the Liberal government quashing entrepreneurship.

As if it were not hard enough to start a new business under the Liberals, their carbon tax is another barrier they have implemented that stifles the growth of small and medium-sized businesses. The Virtex Grain Exchange is being pummelled by the Liberal carbon tax as the price of operation continues to rise, with no end in sight. It is currently being forced to pay over $250,000 annually on the carbon tax. For a company its size, $250,000 would go a long way toward upgrading equipment or toward research and development. Instead, the money is going to fund the out-of-control spending habits of the current government.

In fact it came out earlier this year that the promised rebates to small and medium-sized businesses had not been paid out, as the government was sitting on $2.5 billion of unpaid rebates. If that money had not been taken from businesses to begin with, it could have been invested in Canadian industry, allowing businesses to grow and to employ Canadians.

The Liberal government refuses to listen to Canadians about the burden the carbon tax places on their personal finances as the carbon tax increases each year, artificially driving up the cost of everything. While the Liberals refuse to listen to Canadians on the issue of the carbon tax, it seems that the NDP spent the summer finally listening to its constituents and has finally pulled its support for the carbon tax after voting for it at least 24 times. However, this is too little, too late. Canadians are paying attention and will hold them to account.

Can the government, which has lost the support of the House and of Canadians, commit to calling a carbon tax election to allow Canadians to have their voices heard?

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and to the Minister of Sport and Physical Activity]

Madam Speaker, I would like to start by correcting the record. We have not lost the support of the House. There has not been a confidence vote that the government has lost. In two days, on Wednesday, there is going to be a confidence vote, and all parties have stepped up to say they are just not buying what the Conservatives are putting out there. It is based on false premises. They are, frankly, not being terribly honest with Canadians. This doomsday narrative that they are projecting does not reflect the Canadian sentiment right now.

Canadians are struggling. It is a challenging time out there economically, but the trajectory is really good. Right now, inflation is down to 2%. Interest rates are on their way down; they are going quickly, faster than they are in the United States. Gas prices are actually extremely low, and they are about to get even lower in Ontario because of the winter gas mix coming.

As a result, every aspect of the economy is improving. We have to flip to the back pages of the Financial Post these days to find the doomsday narrative that matches what the Conservatives are saying. We cannot take our foot off the gas pedal. We need to keep working hard for Canadians and finding solutions to improve affordability. The only policy suggestion the Conservatives have made over the last couple of years is to remove the Canada carbon rebate.

A province such as Saskatchewan, which generates the vast majority of its electricity with coal, also needs to ensure that it is ushering in innovation. In 2024, such a country as Canada cannot be relying on technology from 150 years ago to generate our electricity. We can do much better than that. The neighbouring province to my colleague's constituency in Manitoba just brought forth a really great subset of green electricity regulations. It is investing in wind. It already has one of the greenest grids in Canada and Manitoba, so kudos to Premier Kinew. However, Saskatchewan continues to boast that it burns coal to generate electricity, as we did at the turn of the last century. It is time to get with the times. We are better than that. We can be much better than that.

The leader of the Conservative Party and the failed former leader of the Conservative Party, the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle, continually suggest that programs like dental care do not exist in Canada. I am sorry. A quarter of one million Canadians have already accessed care, and 2.5 million Canadians have signed up for their dental care plan card.

The Conservatives have also never acknowledged that the Canada carbon rebate even exists in the House, because it does not fit their doomsday narrative. The Canada carbon rebate has proven to be a safety net in some small way for families who are struggling through these times. Yes, gas prices are coming down, but we have been there. We have been there with new programs, with new policies and with money in Canadians' pockets.

I would encourage the member to learn a bit more about how some of the processes work in Canada. Just recently, on June 13, Environment and Climate Change Canada published the data provided to the PBO on carbon pollution pricing relative to the national and provincial gross domestic products for the 2022-30 period. That is over nine years. The data in this report does not represent a comprehensive economic overview of pollution pricing's impact. It only addresses the specific requests of the PBO. However, even the PBO has recognized that carbon pricing is the least disruptive way to reduce emissions. In fact, it was both Preston Manning's and Stephen Harper's preferred method of reducing emissions, something that we have a responsibility to do, not just with our global colleagues, but also for future generations.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Speaker, that condescending response is just another example of how, when Canadians try to tell the government about how they are struggling, it refuses to listen. Instead, it is intent on drowning out the voices of Canadians with its own deranged ideology. The government has doubled the price of housing and made it easier for criminals to get back on the street; it has caused the day-to-day cost of living to skyrocket.

Canadians are not being fooled by this member or by the Prime Minister. They know the carbon tax makes their lives more unaffordable, and they are struggling after nine years of the corrupt NDP-Liberal government. They are tired of the crime, the corruption, the out-of-control spending and the carbon tax. The Liberal government is fast losing its mandate to lead, and Canadians are ready for change. That was made clear in their devastating loss in Toronto—St. Paul's in June. Instead of—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Adam van Koeverden, Liberal, Milton, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to stand to talk about one of our most successful policies in the last nine years.

When our government took office in 2015, Canada's carbon emissions were rising fast in multiple sectors. It was not just the oil and gas industry, but it was particularly in oil and gas. Since then, they plateaued and are now starting to come down. They have been coming down for years in a row and, just recently, they were another 2% lower.

As I have stated, times continue to be tough, but inflation is down to the Bank of Canada's target range of 2%. As a result, interest rates are down in Canada. That is taking the heat off of many Canadians. That means their mortgages are easier to afford.

In just a couple of weeks, on October 15, 2024, families in Saskatchewan will receive $376 for the Canada carbon rebate. I look forward to discussing this issue more in the House of Commons.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Liberal, Alexandra Mendes]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6:58 p.m.)